Interesting article. A trainer I know teaches her dogs an absolute out command. The dog is to out no matter who gives the command. Basicly what she does is teaches a seperate command and then gives it to some of her neighbors in case of fire or other circumstance that would require the dogs be called off with out her prescence. I wonder about a similar aplication in police work. My concern would be if the command got out allowing suspects the ability to call dogs off.

Richard - teachng a service dog to OUT on command - no matter who gives the command has no place in service dog work.

You friend may think this is a nexeccary command - but what she does not understand is the OUT command is a rank drive command - expecting a dog to mind someone that is not a higher member in rank is not acceptable.

I will bet her dogs are not very strong dogs.

She isn't a friend (she owes me money). I was in fact quite suprised as to how strong her dogs were, and I was looking for them to perform poorly. The dog is not a very rank dog though, and that is part of the selection she uses to select dogs. I don't believe that this type of training would work for a service dog, even if it could be trained, based on the fact that if the command got out the dog is now totally ineffective.

guy lets get back to the article Kelly George posted its worth debate.

Has anyone read this newspaper article?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40046-2001Dec29.html

I read the article.
It sounds like there are serious problems with training (of both staff and dogs)
How about that officer that sent a dog on the homeless guy...Bet that former cop will enjoy living with some of the people that they locked up. Going to be a rough 10 years. A dirty cop gives the rest of those brave, honest police officers a black eye.
To all the good cops everywhere:
Thank You and God Bless!

milt,
Iv'e read the article, they keep popping up every couple of months on the net. Followed by everyone's personal story of how bad thier local K-9 unit is lol.
Usually preceded by "Some of my best friends are cop's" "A local k-9 trainer /handler told Me".
The only thing that keeps amazing me is...whenever there seems to be a outcry about use of force.....the "fix all" answer is switch to Bark and Hold.
I feel for the good handlers in this unit.
They have public opinion, pollitical interests against them... may not survive the bloodletting.
Example- Obviously some Lawyer/newspaperman has discovered the public claims made for on the job injuries ie handlers being bit by own dogs, back up officers being bit by police dogs. Often in the case of the assisting officers...thier own fault.
Now ANY dog apprehension is going to merit a civil lawsuit as excessive, as the dogs have a HISTORY of being VICIOUS...Haven't they bitten thier handler and other officers?
All played out to a jury of housewives, retired clerks that are appalled by the idea of a loyal police dog biting it's handler.
Add a FORMER police officer( who I'm sure is above reproach) who will tell the TRUTH about the vicious PSD's.
Major k-9 units in the US have been there before...Philly, LA, Seattle...some have fared better than others.

For Lou Castle. I agree with some of what you say about the mandatory laws in the UK regarding 'stand offs' If a criminal stops and puts his hand up and is pointing a gun at the handler or dog, the handler can simply give the 'stop him' command. Some dogs will not attack a passive man though, fortunately mine will and many of my colleagues dogs will. There are others though that simply will not bite and hold a passive man. In my opinion it is hard to really comment on this issue unless you are actually in the situation. Body language can tell you a lot more and help the first initial command easier to make.

You also commented that UK handlers argue that there are more guns in the US. That to me is not important and silly, as you say. We also have a rising trend in the use syringes and these could or could not be lethal. I for one will not take that risk, if someone is in front of me with a syringe (or similar) my dog goes in for the bite.

Ok guys, first time to post here, so be gentle, lolololo. First question: After handler has released his dog, dog is pursuing asshole, asshole
thinks, gosh that was stupid to run, asshole stops, says "I give up". What do you want your dog doing? Seems to me that if he bites in that situation, dept, officer, and city is open for a lawsuit. (Remember, we want more k9 units not less). So, could we make this a win win situation for officer, by having enough control to call dog off before bite? Or does this situation never occur on the street? Sometimes, guys just don't understand all the work and training it takes to maintain optimum working level in these dogs so dog doesn't get enough maintenance training to keep control in. So you experienced officers: "What's the answer?"

Roni;
All working LEO's live in a world where virtually anything they do may leave them open for a lawsuit, and certainly, this includes Canine Units.

Theoretically at least, the officer should be able to recall or down the dog in the situation you describe so there is no bite...and I know of no units deployed on the street that do not train for this...but remember, every situation is different.

Much depends on the specifics of "why" the bad guy is fleeing, the location of the incident, is there a weapon involved?, the politics of the Department, the relationship that Agency has with its' citizens...etc...etc. You get the picture.

The "answer" in a general sense is that each case must be judged on its' own merits, based upon the information known by the officer at the time he released the dog...not everything the investigation reveals later...and CERTAINLY NOT on all the BS the press may or may not tell the truth about to the public!

As for the issue of "control", the street is not a Schutzhund field, and while PSD's are certainly trained to be under control, there is a world of difference between a sport dog's out or recall in a situation where he knows no one is really trying to hurt him, and a street PSD in a situation where he can "feel" the reality of what is happening. For him, it is NO game.

Kinda like the difference between a boxing match in the sterile environment of the ring and a street fight in the alley behind the dumpster. It will be a little more difficult to "call off" the guy who has been getting his ass thumped and now is putting a little "payback" on his opponent, than for the referee to call off the boxers.

All this is why Canine Units train, train and train some more. And why PSDs are deployed with human handlers who make the decisions about what happens.

I train dogs that work on the streets. If the dog is sent after a suspect, the dog will continue the pursuit and when he catches the suspect, he will bite until the handler commands the dog to cease. To do otherwise not only puts the dog at risk but the handler and any other officers that are at the scene. Give it any politically correct term you care to, but when given the command, the dog has one thing on his mind, to bite and hold until commanded, by his handler, to do otherwise. Consistent, objective based training is where you ensure the dog will do as commanded and, just as importantly, only when commanded by the handler.

David Frost